2 days after obama scolds SCOTUS about overturning Obamacare

there can't be any of you who truly feels this administration is anything more than a hack political cartoon. i get the pimpin and patronizing, but at the end of the day you have to shake your head and wonder how you let this bunch of morons pull the wool.

In 1996 Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act by huge bipartisan votes -- 342 to 67 in the House and 85 to 14 in the Senate. President Bill Clinton signed the measure into law.

Now, the Obama administration says DOMA, which permits states to refuse to recognize gay marriages from other states and also creates a federal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman, is unconstitutional. In Boston on Wednesday, Stuart Delery, an attorney for the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, urged the First Circuit Court of Appeals to find DOMA violates the Constitution by discriminating against gays and lesbians. "I'm not here to defend [the law] on any standard," Delery told the court.

What was striking about Delery's request that a federal court strike down DOMA was that just a day or two before, President Obama railed at the very notion that a federal court would strike down any law passed by Congress.

"I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress," Obama said Monday about the arguments over Obamacare before the nation's highest court. The danger presented in the health care case, the president continued, is that "an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law."

The answer is, of course, that the administration is making a political argument for its positions, not a legal one.

“You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift, help small men by tearing down big men, strengthen the weak by weakening the strong, lift the wage-earner by pulling down the wage-payer, help the poor by destroying the rich, establish security on borrowed money, or help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.” —William J. H. Boetcker